Nye offered his thoughts on the Feb. 4 event and why he agreed to it in a letter published in the May/June issue of Skeptical Inquirer magazine.

Ahead of the debate, Nye wrote that everyone he met was talking about it, and he "slowly realized that this was a high pressure situation." The event was streamed live on the web and it was widely discussed on Twitter and Facebook.

"I am by no means an expert on most of this ... In this situation, our skeptical arguments are not the stuff of PhDs. It’s elementary science and common sense. That’s what I planned to rely on. That’s what gave me confidence," he wrote.

"I was and am respectful of Ken Ham’s passion. At a cognitive level, he believes what he says. He really means it, when he says that he has 'a book' that supersedes everything you and I and his parishioners can observe everywhere in nature around us. I respected that commitment; I used it to drive, what actors call, my 'inner monologue,'" Nye wrote.

Nye wrote that despite no score being kept during the debate with Ham, by "a strong majority of accounts, I bested him."

Nye also addressed criticism he received from fellow scientists who said the debate would only promote Ken Ham's ministry and creationism, which teaches the origin story of the Bible as natural history. Ham and his followers believe the universe was made by a creator about 6,000 years ago.

"But, I held strongly to the view that it was an opportunity to expose the well-intending Ken Ham and the support he receives from his followers as being bad for Kentucky, bad for science education, bad for the U.S., and thereby bad for humankind ..." Nye wrote.

Nye thanked those who had sent him ideas and advice to prepare for the debate.

"No matter where this leads, thanks to all of you, who’ve helped me over the years and in recent weeks to think critically and speak clearly about science and reason. It’s in the national interest to enlighten young people. The longest journey starts with but a single step," Nye wrote.